Please read. Possible future for drone hobbyists

[Soonerdrone]

Maybe you legal beagles have not been paying attention to the news the last 50 years.
There are people that still post the "they are going to take our guns away" rants.
There are flat earth believers, bigfoot believers, and conspiracy theorists that post "proof" all the time on you tube.
The tea Party posts a lot of things you might get caught up in as well.
It is not mine or anyone else's fault that you want to believe everything you see on you tube of all places.....
if it happens, it happens. But I wouldnt hold my breath if I were you. Thats all I mean by my initial post.

UMMM why did you bring my buddy Bigfoot into this..He doesn't fly drones just fixed wing

 

[sar104]

There is a petition going around for keeping section 336 intact if anyone wants to sign it. Not sure if anyone wants to but just putting it out there.:

Please keep "Rule 336" of the FAA Modernization act INTACT so it will protect model aviation hobbyists. | We the People: Your Voice in Our Government

Unfortunately the Special Rule for Model Aircraft (AKA Section 336) is now an anachronism. The protection that the AMA lobbied for and achieved was not even remotely in support of sUAS use – it was to protect their core demographic – the classic model aircraft enthusiasts who build and fly model aircraft. The average hobby drone user has no interest in the art of flying - they are using them as a tool for aerial observation, videography and photography. All of which are fine activities but, given the range and capabilities of modern consumer drones and the way that they are used, pose entirely new risks to the NAS and people on the ground.

The FAA has made that point, and the explosion of drone use has made it obvious that further regulation is required. The Special Rule will be revoked. It's not an attempt to kill hobby use of drones – it's an attempt to integrate them safely into the NAS. Yes – it will be more onerous than the current requirement of $5 for a registration and then effectively unfettered use, but that was never going to be adequate. The reason that organization such as DJI are involved in these initiatives is that they see the writing on the wall, and they want to influence the legislation. Their business model depends on hobbyists and so they are obviously not trying to kill it.

 

[JamTek]

Unfortunately the Special Rule for Model Aircraft (AKA Section 336) is now an anachronism. The protection that the AMA lobbied for and achieved was not even remotely in support of sUAS use – it was to protect their core demographic – the classic model aircraft enthusiasts who build and fly model aircraft. The average hobby drone user has no interest in the art of flying - they are using them as a tool for aerial observation, videography and photography. All of which are fine activities but, given the range and capabilities of modern consumer drones and the way that they are used, pose entirely new risks to the NAS and people on the ground.

The FAA has made that point, and the explosion of drone use has made it obvious that further regulation is required. The Special Rule will be revoked. It's not an attempt to kill hobby use of drones – it's an attempt to integrate them safely into the NAS. Yes – it will be more onerous than the current requirement of $5 for a registration and then effectively unfettered use, but that was never going to be adequate. The reason that organization such as DJI are involved in these initiatives is that they see the writing on the wall, and they want to influence the legislation. Their business model depends on hobbyists and so they are obviously not trying to kill it.

I can agree with some of that. So it seems as if they are trying to make everyone take Part 107 to make money to me. They kept using the term "commercial" in the round table discussion. Basically saying that hobbyist are hurting their bottom dollar when I have never seen any business drone ever above me but my flying is a danger to them. Like the one guy said and then was abruptly shut down, they are trying to punish those who fly safely. I wouldn't mind taking Part 107 just to have a better understanding but they would have to change part 107 and add pieces of section 336 in order for the millions of little people who love the hobby and use it commercially not to be completely shut out. The whole ID tag thing is BS though.

 

[sar104]

I can agree with some of that. So it seems as if they are trying to make everyone take Part 107 to make money to me. They kept using the term "commercial" in the round table discussion. Basically saying that hobbyist are hurting their bottom dollar when I have never seen any business drone ever above me but my flying is a danger to them. Like the one guy said and then was abruptly shut down, they are trying to punish those who fly safely. I wouldn't mind taking Part 107 just to have a better understanding but they would have to change part 107 and add pieces of section 336 in order for the millions of little people who love the hobby and use it commercially not to be completely shut out. The whole ID tag thing is BS though.

Either you misunderstood what I wrote or you do not agree with my comments. It has nothing to do with making money from Part 107 testing – who are you thinking is making money from that? And I don't understand your statement about "the millions of little people who love the hobby and use it commercially" – that sounds like a contradiction to me. Anyone using it commercially is not a hobbyist by definition.

 

[JamTek]

Either you misunderstood what I wrote or you do not agree with my comments. It has nothing to do with making money from Part 107 testing – who are you thinking is making money from that? And I don't understand your statement about "the millions of little people who love the hobby and use it commercially" – that sounds like a contradiction to me. Anyone using it commercially is not a hobbyist by definition.

Everything about this has to do with money. Anyone who flies manned aircraft pay fees, right? Whether its for fuel or landing at an airport. There are fees. Hobbyist don't pay fees except for $5 if you decided to register with the FAA. If they get rid off section 336, guess what...the only way you will be able to fly is commercially based off of the roundtable meeting. So therefore if you take the millions of hobbyist and make them take the Part 107 at $150 a pop, thats a lot of pocket change to me. Don't get me wrong the safety piece can be a big issue but there aren't enough reports to suggest the repeal of section 336. They would have to revamp a lot of the regulations to make this work. IJS

 

[sar104]

Everything about this has to do with money. Anyone who flies manned aircraft pay fees, right? Whether its for fuel or landing at an airport. There are fees. If they get rid off section 336, guess what...the only way you will be able to fly is commercially based off of the roundtable meeting. So therefore if you take the millions of hobbyist and make them take the Part 107 at $150 a pop, thats a lot of pocket change to me. Don't get me wrong the safety piece can be a big issue but there aren't enough reports to suggest the repeal of section 336. They would have to revamp a lot of the regulations to make this work. IJS

Why do you think it is all about money? Just because you think everything is about money? Who do you think is profiting from the $150 Part 107 fee? And why does it not make much more sense that the FAA simply wants to get some kind of regulation in place to handle millions of consumer drones flying around in the lower 500 m of the NAS?

 

[JamTek]

Why do you think it is all about money? Just because you think everything is about money? Who do you think is profiting from the $150 Part 107 fee? And why does it not make much more sense that the FAA simply wants to get some kind of regulation in place to handle millions of consumer drones flying around in the lower 500 m of the NAS?

There is always some backdoor hand shaking going on, that is exactly what politics are about. The money per se may not be taken directly from those fees (as you think it does not) but you can bet your behind that these big companies who are trying to take their business to the next level are putting money in pockets to make sure that their drone work isn't interfered with by us, the little people. Plus I have a few friends in DC that work for the DOT, one in particular with the FAA but I guess they just lie to me.

 

[Lake_Flyer]

If hobby drones are regulated away, I just pick up my original flying hobby and fly my scale RC Piper Cub and Kyosho CP Heli again, at a designated RC club airfield. I'm already dusting them off. For me most of the fun is in flying anyway and my shift to drones took that away a bit, apart from the fun of filming, which would be a shame to miss I agree. However, being certified for commercial operations I still would be able to fly my Inspire1 for paid jobs (if I haven't quit that business already, because frankly I'm done competing with the ever growing illegal competition).

I think many if not most droners will drop out just like that when it's getting all to regulated. Most of them are not drawn to the hobby because of the flying anyway, they just needed a new gadget.
I know that many commercial bread and butter pilots are lobbying and hoping that hobby drones get banned all together, because of the illegal competition they often get, AND the negative image drones now have in general, because of the many idiots out there.

 

[mad monkey]

No wonder I'm seeing a lot of "fly away "drone posts... All these tinfoil hats must be giving compass calibration errors..

 

[sar104]

There is always some backdoor hand shaking going on, that is exactly what politics are about. The money per se may not be taken directly from those fees (as you think it does not) but you can bet your behind that these big companies who are trying to take there business to the next level are putting money in pockets to make sure that their drone work isn't interfered with by us, the little people. Plus I have a few friends in DC that work for the DOT, one in particular with the FAA but I guess they just lie to me.

I agree that the big potential commercial users (not manufacturers) such as Amazon have an interest in trying to ensure that hobby use doesn't interfere with commercial operations or lead to over-regulation of sUAS in general. That's fine. The manufacturers, such as DJI, absolutely don't want to hurt the hobby market, so they are just trying to stay ahead of whatever happens.

 

[lmel2005]

This is another "responsible" vs "irresponsible", and "bad people will kill our precious hobby, because they are bad" thread.

In fact, flying a drone IS a hobby, aerial photography and observation IS a hobby also, and all this is a multi-billion business. And none wants to kill this business.

As drone number increases, there will be regulations to ensure safety of people on ground and airspace, but these regulations will not "kill" anyone's hobby.

In ten years from now, drones will fly all over the airspace, safely, doing hundreds of jobs, and saving people, job time, with minimal emissions.
They will be flown by kids, by hobbyists, by professionals, by companies, by policemen, by firemen, by the army, the navy, the scientists, and millions more.

Technology moves on, without banning inventions and useful machines.

 

[Carljames72]

Don't waste your time posting this stuff around here....nobody is interested. I made a post sounding the alarm and all I got was "This was posted before"....LOL....Or you get ridiculed like the guy up there that posted the tin foil hats.

Oh I don't care about those fools. I was just passing along info. Take it or leave it. For the people that don't follow the basic rules (and they are as basic as it gets), I hope they increase the fines and find a better way to track them. The only way people will listen is when the first person gets a huge fine or possible jail. I don't want to see people get killed because of a drone. It hasn't happened, but it could happen. That's the fact, non debatable. That's when the government would shut the drones down completely. They would make it more difficult for commercial pilots to get licenses. Again, just passing it on. If the pic was at least funny, I would have laughed.

 

[ac0j]

Oh I don't care about those fools. I was just passing along info. Take it or leave it. For the people that don't follow the basic rules (and they are as basic as it gets), I hope they increase the fines and find a better way to track them. The only way people will listen is when the first person gets a huge fine or possible jail. I don't want to see people get killed because of a drone. It hasn't happened, but it could happen. That's the fact, non debatable. That's when the government would shut the drones down completely. They would make it more difficult for commercial pilots to get licenses. Again, just passing it on. If the pic was at least funny, I would have laughed.

That was a real tear jerker.....
Can you name a single hobby that was ever banned because of reasons like "THE POSSIBILITY" of damage to health and or property? Or "THE POSSIBILTY" to interfere with commercial use? If things like that happened, people born after 1800 wouldnt even know what a gun was. Baseballs have damaged more health and property than drones will over at least the next ten years, so how are they not banned?
Until it proves to be a continuing problem, they have NO reason to ban it because of a handful of idiots that own them.
So RELAX! go fly your drone and have fun! The tinfoil hat may help with the garbage trying to penetrate your brain. Use the picture to make your own!

 

[macoman]

Unfortunately the Special Rule for Model Aircraft (AKA Section 336) is now an anachronism. The protection that the AMA lobbied for and achieved was not even remotely in support of sUAS use – it was to protect their core demographic – the classic model aircraft enthusiasts who build and fly model aircraft. The average hobby drone user has no interest in the art of flying - they are using them as a tool for aerial observation, videography and photography. All of which are fine activities but, given the range and capabilities of modern consumer drones and the way that they are used, pose entirely new risks to the NAS and people on the ground.

The FAA has made that point, and the explosion of drone use has made it obvious that further regulation is required. The Special Rule will be revoked. It's not an attempt to kill hobby use of drones – it's an attempt to integrate them safely into the NAS. Yes – it will be more onerous than the current requirement of $5 for a registration and then effectively unfettered use, but that was never going to be adequate. The reason that organization such as DJI are involved in these initiatives is that they see the writing on the wall, and they want to influence the legislation. Their business model depends on hobbyists and so they are obviously not trying to kill it.

Agreed, remember too that DJI own basically the drone business worldwide and is a lot of money here and this is why they want to have an influence in whatever legislation change to the rules for hobby flying.
DJI don't want to lose that big pipe of money they get from us buying their products.
DJI have powerful lawyers too that I am pretty sure are lobbying the politicians to make sure that their business don't get affect by any modification to 336.

 

[jws926]

If you understood how YouTube works you would understand that no one gets any revenue from YouTube views. Not a penny. The channel only get a commission when someone clicks on an ad. YouTube does not pay anyone

Now if you only understood how Youtube works you would understand that you do for a fact earn revenue from views, because, if no one is viewing your video's , no one is watching the ads, so yes, clickbait is 100% to get views.

To even have monetization on your channel, you have to have at least a total of 4000 hours of watch content in conjunction with 1,000 subscribers .

So the person that you were quoting was 100% correct with his statement.

Respectively submitted.

 

[Chip]

I am attaching a link to a video regarding insight to the possible future of drone hobbyists. If you enjoy flying your drones, and follow the laws laid out by FAA then it is definitely worth 10;minutes of your time. If you don’t have your drone registered and don’t follow the guidelines, then you are part of the problem.

Yes, the videos you guys posted are very informative. Well worth the watch. The second video briefly raises an interesting side issue. If hobby drone must be flown with a transponder that broadcasts personal ID and flight path to anyone with an aeroscope then is the general public not entitled to access the very same information as to any UAS or plane (other than military) flying in the sky? Hint: The big commercial operators whined to the FAA about how they need to keep their pilot personal ID and flight info top secret but demanded radical transparency for everyone else.

 

[Carljames72]

That was a real tear jerker.....
Can you name a single hobby that was ever banned because of reasons like "THE POSSIBILITY" of damage to health and or property? Or "THE POSSIBILTY" to interfere with commercial use? If things like that happened, people born after 1800 wouldnt even know what a gun was. Baseballs have damaged more health and property than drones will over at least the next ten years, so how are they not banned?
Until it proves to be a continuing problem, they have NO reason to ban it because of a handful of idiots that own them.
So RELAX! go fly your drone and have fun! The tinfoil hat may help with the garbage trying to penetrate your brain. Use the picture to make your own!

Cool story. I was passing along info. If you think it’s nonsense then you don’t have to pay attention. I could honesty care less. Whatever part of my statement had you thinking it was emotional was incorrect. I worked for the government for many years, Also served in the Marines for about 10 years. I know how it works. Nothing in that video is far fetched. It boils down to money. How many drone pilots are there total (both professional and hobbyists)? Not enough for the general public to really care. If we had on ****** hats and carried around dildos then we might have a shot. And yes I will keep on flying.

 

[Classic flyer]

That rant is usually a sell job from the right and ends with vote Republican. If we had a lobby behind us as strong as the NRA we wouldn't be having this conversation. And I've seen no evidence that the left or the right is on our side here.

The AMA is to model aviation what the NRA is to the gun community...be safe, fly smart

 

[macoman]

The AMA is to model aviation what the NRA is to the gun community...be safe, fly smart

Not really, the NRA is a powerful organization that even politicians are scare not to listen to them. The AMA is not a powerful entity like the NRA, they don't have the influence. They may talk to politicians but they don't care about too much. Put it this way, the NRA is like this dude in a Bentley car, any where he go, people will have respect. The AMA is like a dude in an old Volkswagen beetle. Who is going to take serious this guy?

 

[ac0j]

Not really, the NRA is a powerful organization that even politicians are scare not to listen to them. The AMA is not a powerful entity like the NRA, they don't have the influence. They may talk to politicians but they don't care about too much. Put it this way, the NRA is like this dude in a Bentley car, any where he go, people will have respect. The AMA is like a dude in an old Volkswagen beetle. Who is going to take serious this guy?

I agree, I always thought AMA was american motorcycle assoc., or something like that.
The FAA leaving self regulation of the hobby via AMA guidelines is just the FAA setting up a scape goat. If something bad happens, they can blame it on the AMA, people will try to sue the AMA, etc. because there is money there. just like some victims of gun crimes blame the NRA.